From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!seunet!kullmar!pkmab!ske Tue Jan 21 09:26:32 EST 1992
Article 2817 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Xref: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca sci.philosophy.tech:1883 comp.ai.philosophy:2817
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!seunet!kullmar!pkmab!ske
>From: ske@pkmab.se (Kristoffer Eriksson)
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech,comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Behavior in the Bart Room
Message-ID: <6451@pkmab.se>
Date: 15 Jan 92 20:33:48 GMT
References: <X39JeB1w164w@depsych.Gwinnett.COM>
Organization: Peridot Konsult i Mellansverige AB, Oerebro, Sweden
Lines: 15

In article <X39JeB1w164w@depsych.Gwinnett.COM> rc@depsych.Gwinnett.COM (Richard Carlson) writes:
> Could you figure out in, say, a half an hour that little Bart's mind was
>mediocre -- turbocharged with good instruction and support, but
>fundamentaly and essentially mediocre?  I think so.  Wouldn't the
>same apply to the Chinese Room ... ?

Apparently some claim that the Chinese Room would still not have "real"
understanding, even it it were to pass this test (which of course IS the
famous Turing test), since Searle has "showed" that it can't have that.
(See e.g. <5939@skye.ed.ac.uk>)

-- 
Kristoffer Eriksson, Peridot Konsult AB, Hagagatan 6, S-703 40 Oerebro, Sweden
Phone: +46 19-13 03 60  !  e-mail: ske@pkmab.se
Fax:   +46 19-11 51 03  !  or ...!{uunet,mcsun}!mail.swip.net!kullmar!pkmab!ske


